Showcase #6 · Batch #2
Nuclear Physics (A = 3, fusion-adjacent)

Triton Binding Energy

A nuclear-physics theorem shown numerically in one bar chart — the 3-body force is essential.

Bedaque–Hammer–van Kolck (1999) — LO 3-body counterterm in pionless EFTarXiv
Triton Binding Energy

The essential-physics ablation. 2-body attraction alone binds the deuteron correctly at −2.224 MeV but over-binds the triton by 8 MeV (schematic Thomas collapse). Adding the LO 3-body counterterm restores the triton to exactly −8.482 MeV while leaving the deuteron unchanged.

−8.482 MeV
Experimental triton binding — reproduced by the LO 3-body counterterm

[ overview ]

What this reproduces & why it matters

Triton (³H = 1 proton + 2 neutrons) is the fuel side of the D + T fusion reaction — the reaction ITER runs on and every commercial fusion reactor targets. It's also the lightest three-nucleon bound state, and its physics differs qualitatively from the deuteron's.

Bedaque, Hammer, and van Kolck (1999) proved that pionless effective field theory at leading order requires a 3-body counterterm to reproduce triton binding — a 2-body attraction alone leads to the Thomas collapse. This showcase demonstrates that theorem numerically: a schematic 4-qubit shell-model Hamiltonian shows the over-binding without the counterterm and the exact restoration with it.

Cited alongside Das et al. (2026) — a 54–66 qubit ext-SQD demonstration on IBM Heron R3 that computes tritium binding in FLiBe molten-salt fusion blankets. This showcase is the nuclear-scale complement to that chemistry-scale demonstration.

[ verified results ]

Every number below is [PASS]-checked in source.

verified
VQE error vs. exact diagonalization
machine precision
7.6 × 10⁻⁸ MeV
Deuteron sector energy (tuned)
matches experimental
−2.224 MeV
Triton sector energy (tuned, full 2+3-body model)
matches experimental
−8.482 MeV
Triton over-binding without the 3-body counterterm
schematic Thomas collapse — 8 MeV over-bound
−16.522 MeV
ZNE mitigation improvement at 0.1× Heron50.8×
ZNE mitigation improvement at 1× Heron
medium-depth data point (18-gate ansatz)
5.6×

[ method ]

How it's built

Schematic 4-qubit shell-model Hamiltonian: 3 identical spinless nucleons in a 4-level harmonic-oscillator basis. Kinetic + nearest-shell hopping + attractive density-density pair + LO 3-body counterterm.

Tuning is done via scipy.brentq root-find on the exact-diag spectrum: V₂ = 15.902681 MeV binds the deuteron sector to −2.224 MeV; V₃ = −8.040461 MeV (repulsive) then restores the triton sector to −8.482 MeV. VQE reaches the exact ground state with a 3-parameter Givens-rotation ansatz to 7.6 × 10⁻⁸ MeV — machine precision.

[ circuit ]

The actual Qiskit circuit

hardware-buildable
3-parameter Givens-rotation ansatz for the 4-qubit triton

3-parameter number-conserving Givens-rotation ansatz from the |1110⟩ HF reference, decomposed to RY + CX primitives (~18 two-qubit gates total). The 3 rotations connect occupied orbitals {0, 1, 2} to virtual orbital 3.

[ figures ]

Physics visuals

VQE convergence to the exact triton ground state
VQE + SPSA convergence trajectory. The 3-parameter Givens-rotation ansatz reaches the exact ground state to 7.6 × 10⁻⁸ MeV over 2000 iterations — machine precision.
ZNE recovery across three noise scales
ZNE recovery scales with hardware quality: 50.8× at 0.1× Heron (near-term error-corrected regime), 5.6× at 1× Heron, 2.3× at 3× Heron. The honest medium-depth data point between shallow (H₂/QVME uniform 30×) and deep (Unruh saturates) mitigation regimes.

[ mitigation ]

What Qubital's ZNE buys you here

The 18-gate Givens ansatz sits between the shallow (H₂/QVME) and deep (Unruh) mitigation regimes. At 1× Heron scale, ZNE recovery is 5.6× — meaningful but reduced from the shallow-ansatz 30×. At 0.1× Heron, recovery jumps to 50.8×. This is an honest data point on the depth-vs-mitigation curve.

[ references ]

Papers & sources

  • Bedaque, P. F., Hammer, H.-W., van Kolck, U. (1999). "Three-Body Forces from Pionless Effective Field Theory." Nucl. Phys. A 646, 444.
  • Hammer, H.-W., König, S., van Kolck, U. (2020). "Nuclear Effective Field Theory: Status and Perspectives." Rev. Mod. Phys. 92, 025004.
  • Dumitrescu, E. F. et al. (2018). "Cloud Quantum Computing of an Atomic Nucleus." Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 210501.
  • Das, S. et al. (2026). "Quantum Computations on Fusion Blanket Molten Salts."
    arXivThe chemistry-scale FLiBe complement to this nuclear-scale showcase

[ what's next ]

Roadmap for this showcase

roadmap
  • ³He (helium-3) — same nuclear framework, mirror-nucleus binding-difference story
  • A = 4 (⁴He / α-particle) scaling — the natural next step; α is remarkably bound (28 MeV)
  • Hardware run on Heron r2 with the full mitigation stack (~18-gate depth is within current ZNE-tractable range)
  • Jacobi-coordinate no-core shell model — the "real" A=3 pionless-EFT calculation as a from-first-principles replacement for the schematic tuning

[ request access ]

Want to run this yourself?

The physics-showcases repo is currently private, protecting IP pre-revenue. Physicists, quantum-industry contacts, and investors: reach out and I'll set up a technical walkthrough, call, or Loom.

Request a walkthrough